Sacrospinous ligament fixation with uterine preservation reduces the risk of anatomical recurrence in pelvic organ prolapse

Clinical Effect of Uterosacral and Cardinal Ligament Fixation versus Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation of Vaginal Vault Prolapse: A Retrospective Analysis

Objective

This study aimed at comparing sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) with uterosacral and cardinal ligament fixation (USCLF) concerning complications and outcomes in patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients with POP stage III or above uterine prolapse treated at Wenzhou People's Hospital from January 2013 to December 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: USCLF group and SSLF group. The perioperative indicators, postoperative complications, pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20), and POP/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-12 (PISQ-12) scores of the groups were analyzed and compared.

Results

(1) The operative time and intraoperative blood loss in the USCLF group were lower than those in the SSLF group, with statistical significance (p < 0.05). (2) The incidence of postoperative buttock pain in the SSLF group was 10.7% (6/56), higher than that in the USCLF group (0/56) (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.027). (3) At one year of follow-up, significant improvement in Aa, Ba, C, Ap, and Bp values was observed in both groups (p < 0.05). The values of the Aa and Ba sites in the USCLF group were lower than those in the SSLF group one year after surgery (p < 0.05). (4) The PFDI-20 and PISQ-12 scores of the groups one year after surgery were lower than those before surgery (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Uterosacral and cardinal ligament suture fixation leads to less bleeding and better postoperative quality of life than preoperative and may be better than SSLF at preventing the recurrence of anterior wall prolapse after surgery.

Case report: Transvaginal single-port extraperitoneal laparoscopic sacrospinous ligament fixation for apical prolapse: A single-center case series

Background

Sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) is a minimally invasive and effective procedure for the treatment of apical prolapse. Because intraoperative exposure of the sacrospinous ligament is difficult, SSLF is difficult. The aim of our article is to determine the safety and feasibility of single-port extraperitoneal laparoscopic SSLF for apical prolapse.

Methods

This single-center, single-surgeon case series study included 9 patients with pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) III or IV apical prolapse who underwent single-port laparoscopic SSLF. Additionally, transobturator tension-free vaginal tap (TVT-O) was performed in 2 patients, and anterior pelvic mesh reconstruction was performed in 1 patient.

Results

The operative time ranged from 75 to 105 (mean, 88.9 ± 10.2) min, and blood loss ranged from 25 to 100 (mean, 43.3 ± 22.6) ml. No serious operative complications, blood transfusions, visceral injuries, or postoperative gluteal pain were reported for these patients. After 2–4 months of follow-up, no recurrence of POP, gluteal pain, urinary retention/incontinence, or other complications was observed.

Conclusion

Transvaginal single-port SSLF is a safe, effective, and easy-to-master operation for apical prolapse.

Single-port laparoscopic sacrospinous ligament suspension via the natural vaginal cavity (SvNOTES) for pelvic prolapse: The first feasibility study

Objective

This study aims to investigate the feasibility and short-term efficacy of single-port laparoscopic-assisted transvaginal natural cavity endoscopic sacrospinous ligament suspensions (SvNOTES).

Methods

A total of 30 patients diagnosed with anterior or/and middle pelvic organ prolapse Stages III and IV underwent natural vaginal cavity (SvNOTES), and 30 patients who underwent conventional sacrospinous ligament (SSLF) were used as a control group. The operation time, blood loss, postoperative POP-Q score, length of hospital stay, and complications were compared between the two groups.

Results

The operation time for SvNOTE was (60 ± 13) min, which was longer than (30 ± 15) min for SSLF (P = 0.04). However, the bleeding amount in SvNOTE was 29.44 ± 2.56, significantly lower than that in the SSLF group (80 ± 10; P = 0.02), and the postoperative hospital stay in the SvNOTE group was (4 ± 2) days, longer than (3 ± 1) days in SSLF (P = 0.02). However, there were no intraoperative complications in the SvNOTE group, whereas one ureteral injury occurred in the SSLF group; in addition, the postoperative POP-Q score was significantly better in the SvNOTE group than that in the SSLF group with increasing time (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Compared with SSLF, single-port laparoscopic sacrospinous ligament suspension via the natural vaginal cavity is visualized, greatly improving the success rate of sacrospinous ligament fixation, with less blood loss and fewer complications, arguably a safer and minimally invasive surgical approach.